Wesleyan University Press

University Press of New England, Hanover, NH 03755

I994 by Wesleyan University
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
Edited by Norman Bryson,
Michael Ann Holly,
and Keith Maxey
5 43 2. r
Cll' data appear at the end of the book
Images
VISUAL
and
CULTURE
Interpretations
Wesleyan University Press
Acknowledgments for previously published chapters
appear at the beginning of the Notes section for each
chapter; acknowledgments for illustrations appear in
the captions.
Published by University Press of New England
Hanover and London
NORMAN
Cericault and "Masculinity"
B R Y SON
I
Nthis paper, I bring together two distinct inquiries: the first, an
inquiry into some aspects of the cultural construction of mascu-
linity; and the second, an inquiry into certain works by the French
nineteenth-century painter Theodore Cericault (1791-1824). But first, I
should explain what lies behind this juxtaposition. My claimisthat, in
some sense, the two inquiries are one and the same: that you can view
Gericaulr's ~ as itself an inSl.!:!it~,construction- of masculine
identity or identitiesj.n_~~ context oHiisdass and,perio(His
class would b . tic and upp-erl5OufgWlsIiUITeuto which
Gericault belonged, and theperio~&-Gel'-iGabl.lt.:s-f)utputaSa
parnter-from the late Napoleonic context of hrsIirsrmilitary subjects
(after 1810) to the post-Restoration context of his last paintings (1822-
1823). If Gericault's work isitself aseriesof explorations of masculinity
and masculine identity, then to talk about his painting in our own time
would be a strange enterprise if wewere not to take into account cur-
rent discourses that explore masculinity. These are necessarily diverse
and contradictory; selection is essential, and heremyselection has been
guided by the questions raised infilmstudies (though entirely pertinent
to art history) concerning the gendered nature of the gaze.
A classic objection to the juxtaposition of works of visual art with
discourses on sexual difference isthat inevitably thework of art ends up
merely repeating and confirming the themes and terms of the discourse
on sexuality, that Gericault's paintings are sure to end up as allegories
of that discourse, that painting ls_bound..to-be-demqred and relegated
to a secondary and illustrarize.staeus. This charge has particular force
'when the discourse on sexuality does not of itself address the visual.
Then one is dealing far more with two independent fields, where the
reality of painting as avisual construction islost in, or becomes second-
ary to, the verbal discourse on sexuality. But what is interesting about
the way the present period theorizes sexual differenceisthat questions
of the visual are of primary importance in the discourse on sexuality:
What isvisual or "figural"~bou.t.Pilil1ting-as opposed to_whatevecdis-
cursive or iconographic content it maypossess-is no longer outside or
I. Photograph of Arnold Schwarzenegger, from
Encyclopedia of Modern Body Building (New
York, I9B7)
230 NORMAN BRYSON Gericault and "Masculinity"
231
lost to the discussion hut has moved almost to center stage..!llcjalJ o
thediscussion of theifIl~g-~~a~~~~11theal1aJ )'sis()fthe. gaze; inparticu-
Iar, that kernelof theanalysis that de~ribesag()i!linant"heterosexual"
optic inwhich visual ictivityjsculturallyconstruct~d ~crossasi?lltbe-
tween. active (::: male) and passiye {:=_femaleLroles=c:where the man
isbearerofthel~ok-,-an~_~b~ ~()I11<l~_~~_the o1J j~t:U()!!f.;~;:i~oking, is
"image, Perhaps I should explain that I have no particular quarrel with
this analysis, which seems to meto conformto thefacts not only of cur-
rent constructions of visuality but of important phases and formations
within Western European painting. In this paper, I want to follow the
recent work of others, including KajaSilverman, SteveNeale, and Mary
Ann Doane, inadding to that model with theintention of extending its
explanatory power and also, perhaps, itspolitical effectiveness.'
My principal modification to the model ("Woman asImage, Man as
Bearer of the Look") concerns what may appear as an anomaly within
it: that while the model probes issll~J :q_d9_:with-the.ma1e's_pel:pective
onthefemale, a~_E!~()!(1.aine.~ ... ()~iec!_of}()()~igg)i~m<ty_he..relatively
un~t:!~c:~~rop~din.dealing wirhwhat-ILattflJ (e ip.Ine..I:n.alegaze.. tlPon
_a~:>t~<:E.!!!~~' I~_E.1:Q(:tf:l~.sta_bli..hes.'yQ:y:~i.SlJ U1J ..!~_ central proc-ess
in~~?e~~~.!'p'ectator' s r~~!!.91),tothe-imageof. theJ em~-aruriCriPti:-
BCllti()l1_a..~!he_~,,:n_t:!"~Lp!:~l:e_s_~.inJ he-1llak.spectatQI:~_QsttiQningwith
e.~ard!~_!~':_~3_!!!~_QLth~male.For example, Laura Mulvey's initial
analysis of therelation of themalespectator tothemalecharacter inthe
films shecites, stresses how the maleviewer steps into the male char-
acter's shoes, aligns his viewpoint with that of the character, projects
himself into the landscape of the narrative, and sees from within that
diegetic space.' Mulvey suggests that this process is easy for the male
spectator, especially in those cases where such filmic codes astheview-
pointing of shot/reverse shot establish the camera as seeing from the
point of viewof the male character or intra-diegetic hero. But the ease
with which such codes invite the male spectator into the space and
landscape within the film should not, I think, be taken at face value.
Rather, easeof identification here might bethought of asportraying an
"enchanted" relationship between malespectator andmale character, a
streamlining into an easy conveyance and projection of identifications
that, for the malespectator, may involvecrucial difficulties. One might
suggest herethat thestreamlined easeof projection that invites themale
spectator to align himself with the perspective of the malehero in fact
exists to simplify and to pacify the mechanism of intermale identifica-
tion-which I suggest is a much thornier business than the enchanted
fiction of identificatory easeproposes.
Ibegin with one of the first lessons that men might take to heart
from feminism and learn to apply to their own situations: .t,llllLgender
isprimar.iJ y a cllitural construction, andfrJ ..x:all, for men and women
~J lke-:-W~i~4-,!i_6I1c~1Q(:at~~~m~(';1l1~itY_~OLa~_rja:turaITY. gii~n:~~~t~s
911st.rq~tiQJ ).and_a.jl,cQg,tinl!21.l.s_COl!s!ru'OtiQIl~h?:t has..t9g() until the
sllbject's clyingday. To be a subject constructed as a male involves a
tiecessary masquerade, the masquerade of themasculine. Although the
mechanisms for producing the gender masquerade are necessarily dif-
ferent for each gender position (whichI will elucidate on later) what is
held in common is the strain of that continuous production. The mas-
querade isinterminable, not least becauseof thesanctions against those
who would try to escapeit. Byasystemof "cross-censorship," 3 the same
codes of masculine identity that thesubject introjects into his own case
heprojects outward onto all other males as acontinuous injunction to
maintain the codes. Deviation or failure to obey that constant injunc-
tion risks instant and severepenalties. This censorship already points to
ways in which the masculine masquerade is directed not only towards
women but towards other males. It points, thereby, to the anomaly in
the model that I mentioned just now: that the male isnot only_bearer
.,<?i!h~_mal~...ga.:?-~!lJ :j~_~J 'Q ..Q~i.ectof that gaz~~-Th-;;~e"a;;~ly~~s of male
identification that posit easeof access-Ontne-piii:tof the maleviewer (of
films, of paintings) omit precisely this coerciveaspect of identification.
And this can block theway to getting at what liesbehind that coercion:
thefears, anxieties, andstrains of producing themasculine (asonemight
produce aplay inwhich theactors constantly risk forgetting their lines).
The issueof themasquerade impliesat theleast some common ground
of experience across the genders, for the male subject no less than the
female is constructed in the fieldof vision by asplit between "I seemy-
self" and "I seemyself seeing myself"; or, more simply, between being
at the same time the subject of the malegazeand its object. The latter
position, that of object, is a matter of intermale surveillance, constant
monitoring, patrolling, and inspection. The policing here ranges from
actual encounters with the law to introjection of the Law asinterpella-
tion. Yet what one thinks of assoon asthemasquerade is named isthe
asymmetry of thesexeswith regard tothemasquerade of gender and the
particular intensity with which the mechanisms of identification must
bite into the malesubject.
NORMAN BRYSON Gericault and "Masculinity"
233
In Genesis 9: 20, onereads of the drunkenness of Noah: with the mother. The subject, maleor female, goes through the filter of
the Oedipus towards two quite different resolutions and setsof identifi-
cations: one with theimago of themother, theother with theimago of
the father. Again it goes without sayingthat, giventhe polymorphous-
ness of infantile sexuality, onewould not expect otherwise; and given
the cultural valorization that establishesonly oneof these modes ascor-
rect, one obviously will emergemuch more strongly and hide the other
from view.
To stay now with the male's situation, thepassage through the Oedi-
pus brings quite particular contradictions and vicissitudes in its wake.
The primary difficulty isthelibidinal attachment to the father, which I
take to bewhere the story of Noah's sons seeingtheir father's naked-
ness comes closeto alocus of anxiety. ThepositiveOedipus eclipses the
negative by making themalechildidentifywith thefather andrenounce
the libidinal ties of what might becalled the father/son romance; yet,
in so far as the positive resolution remains unable fully to eclipse the
negative, there remain those libidinal residues that can no longer find
their object. The libidinal currents that had formerly centered on the
father areproscribed and unaccounted for; nowthat they aredeprived,
and permanently so, of their object, they must enter astate of constant
quest.' One is dealing herewith an excess, that which cannot take part
in identification and lies outside identification with the father and adja-
cent to it. One might note that the same situation occurs for the girl,
for the residues of the negative Oedipus persist in enjoining identifi-
cation with the imago of the father, against thecultural pressures that
proscribe this. Yet a second disturbance now occurs that is specific to
the male: that while he is enjoined to be like the father, hecannot and
must not belikethefather in one crucial respect, namel)Uhatlte_cannot
_-R<?ssessthe fath:~L~~!:x!L'!LQI;iyil~g~~!1c~p()Yicr.There issues fo-;:cli" an
imp<l"ssiote'i:!oublecommand: to belikethefather, but not to be likethe
father with respect to his sexual power. J ust when the maleassumes the
male position, he cannot assume it fully; which is to say that the male
must produce masculinity and yet not produce it-a play inwhich the
actor is not so much indanger of forgetting his lines as of being struck
dumb inthe first act.
I opened this essay with a photograph of Arnold Schwarzenegger
pumping iron, and I meant it to designate theeffort, the sweat, of pro-
ducing the masculine masquerade (fig. r). I nowwant to comment on a
Greek sculpture, theDoryphoros of Polykleitos (fig,2), examining both
itsidealization of themalebody andwhat I taketobeSchwarzenegger's
[Noah] planted avineyard;andhedrankof thewine,andbecamedrunk,
andlay uncoveredinhistent. AndHam, thefatherof Canaan, sawthe
nakednessof hisfather,andtoldhistwobrothersoutside.ThenShemand
J apheth took a garment,laid it uponboth their shoulders, and walked
backwardandcoveredthenakednessoftheirfather;theirfaceswereturned
away,andtheydidnotseetheir father'snakedness.
Why is it that the sight of the father's nakedness provokes such distur-
bance in the sons that they must walk backwards to avoid it? There is
no question here of recognizing and experiencing the trauma of sexual
difference; if there istrauma here, it cannot beof the same kind as the
disturbance that centers on genital difference. If thefather's genitals are
the same and yet aredisturbing, then theissuemust bethat, infact, they
are not the same: Between the father's genitals and his own, the son
recognizes a difference of another order, where the stakes are not the
same as those in sexual difference, though perhaps no lesshigh.
Freud's texts have theadvantage of beingableto approach this trau-
matic terrain better than most others, and onecaninvoke certain of his
texts here for the clarity of their exposition. What they establish is the
Oedipus as the structure tothink through thedifficulty in theintermale
relation of identification. Thelocusof thetrouble is, of course, thephysi-
cal and affective relation of the child to itsparents, which the Oedipus
mO,del:-esolves ?ifferently for eachsex. Herewemight recall, following
Kaja Silverman s account, Freud's useof the concepts of the "positive"
and the "negative" Oedipus." For the girl, the "positive" resolution of
t~e?edi~us liesinbreaking thedirect libidinal tiesto thefather byiden-
tlfyl~g w,It,ht~erel~yof ~hemother. This isthedominant resolution, yet
the positive Oedipus ISaccompanied by a "negative" version where
t~e reverse occurs: in the negativeversion, the girl deals with libidinal
~Iest? ~er m~ther by identification with the father, inother words, by
identifying WIththemasculineposition. It goeswithout sayingthat only
one of these versions, the"positive" Oedipus, goesaccording to cultural
pl~n ,and e~lipses, the other. N?w consider the same problem, of the
chIl~,s relatl~n to Itsparents, asIt affectsthemalechild. For theboy, the
posinve Oedipus requires that libidinal ties to his mother bestructured
through the relay of identification with thefather; at thesame time, the
accompanying negative Oedipus structures the libidinal field the other
way round, breaking thedirect libidinal ties to thefather byidentifying
NORMAN BRYSON Gericault and "Masculinity"
235
2. AfterPolykleitos,Do-
ryphoros; Romancopyin
marbleof bronzeorigi-
nal fromfifthcenturyBeE.
Naples, Archeological
Museum; photo courtesy
SoprintendenzaArcheologica
delleProvincedi Napoli e
Caserta.
Greek tendency inthis period to limit life-sized or enlarged genitals to
comic and bacchic scenes, to the realmof thesatyrical; the Polykleitos
!~gards underplayingand diminution of thegenitals as essenrial.fer-irs'
higl1er.PllIPoses. The convention IS so familiar that it isstill possible to
overlook its aspect of the bizarre; for idealization here entails that the
discrepancy between the viewer's sense of his own sex and the ideal,
aswell as the accompanying anxiety, beresolved byso diminishing the
genitalia that no anxiety concerning discrepancy will arise. The gap be-
tween actuality and the imago is dealt with by reversing it so that the
idealized genitalia do not compete with the real thing; or, more pre-
cisely, they are made to compete-gap and disparity are presented-
but the spectator wins. In this case, the anxious gap between the male
spectator and the imago of masculinity can beprecisely measured as a
ratio: as the sculpture's genitals arediminished relative to actual geni-
tals, so the sense of the male's genital self-possession and sexual power
stands inrelation to themasculine imago. What isfeared and cannot be
assumed by the male subject is the sexuality of the imago, a fear that
inthe case of thesculpture isdefused bythestrategy of diminution and
sublimation.
The Schwarzenegger exampleachievesasimilar effectthrough intense
fetishization of the muscular. The first point I wished to make through
this image was the sweat of the masculine masquerade, the Herculean
effort required if the body is to achieve the masculine ideal. My sec-
ond point is, once more, to do with genital presentation. First, ,genital
conceal~!i.!~sential_~:yJ th.ill:t~i.~visu~1 aesthetic.. :,.!~ .. ~"E~se.!!!Uythe
fJ ~I.':t~E":.~.,~"~,~I~~!~~i~!9.J e~ve~e~ill,~ th~yi~u:lLar~ml in.whic]; the
activ!!ris ~IlPp()s~~to takeplacefor analtogether different visual genre.
'S'econd,"fhebody outline that results fromthis particular cultivation of
musculature is such that enlargement is present in every bodily zone
except the area concealed. The result is the sense that the body can
~cL.t()~ surprising degree-it iscapable or pneumatically
pumping itself up until aremarkably altered silhouette results-yet the
concealed area remains outside the process of inflation, absolutely out
of play (in many older photographs of this type, onefindstraces of air-
brushing, effacing the area completely). Again, this strategy allows the
"magnificent" imago to achieveavisibleappearance before others and
before theself, but leavesout thequestion of sexuality. Third, an actually
fetishistic strategy seems to befollowed: Attention passes, according to
the classical model of fetishism," away fromtheprimary zone of sex to
secondary displacements. Thewhole body isphallicized, frommarks of
efforts at the same. Idealization might be defined here as the gap be-
tween the actual body and that higher imago of thebody that constitutes
the masculine ideal, the identification to which themalesubject aspires
and is also prevented from attaining, at the point of sexual power. Of
course, such discrepancy between thesenseof the body as actually in-
habited by its owner and the senseof the body as also existing in some
ideal form is aprimary component inthe foundation of the Imaginary,
at least if we follow Lacan's early paper here. Itstroubled relation to the
ego-image is one that both sexesshare,"
What is striking in both these visual examples is the extraordinary
disavowal of libidinal investment present inthe representations. In the
case of the sculpture, one could speak of its mathematical purity, its
construction according to acanon of perfect proportions, its classicism:
here I will mention only the diminished size of its genitals. It is the
236 NOR MAN B R Y SON
inflation, to removal of body hair, to exaggerated dilation of theveins.
The masculine imago is contemplated, inother words, by crossing out
the actual genital area andpassing its characteristics to the body image
as awhole via atrope of metonymy: thewhole ismade to stand for the
part (as in the grammatical example of "Your Majesty," used to address
the king).
Such examples might seemsimply to point to the homoerotic, and
perhaps they do, but what is of no lessinterest is the installation of a
certain libidinal structure within masculinities that arenot perceived as
deviating from orthodox masculine coding. On the contrary, the Greek
ideal became culturally central for all systems of visual representation
touched by classicism andneo-classicism, inthemany periods of its ap-
pearance. The cult of bodybuilding may beculturally marginal, yet it is
by no means proscribed, and its influenceis currently closer to middle-
class culture than inmany earlier periods. Inother words, within cultur-
ally valorized constructions of codes for masculinity, onefinds striking
evidence of the proximity of thenegativeOedipus to itsmore successful
and positive partner. The image of masculinity is charged with libidi-
nal currents that are consistent with formations that are regarded as
nondeviant and non-"pathological."
Perhaps I may mention inpassing two stories, onefromWoody Allen
and the other a personal recollection. At one point in (I think) Zelig,
Woody Allen plays a psychoanalytic rebel who breaks with Freud over
apoint of doctrine". The dispute concerns the concept of "penis envy,"
which he complains, Freud wanted toconfinetowomen. The second isa
personal experience. For reasons I now hardly recall, inthe early 1970S
Iwas visiting the Esalen Institute at Big Sur at the same time that an
experimental drug rehabilitation program for Vietnam veterans was in
progress. The program was shrouded insecrecy-the areawhere it was
taking place was surrounded by military police-and the vets and the
visitors to Esalen only met at the showers (Esalen being famous for its
waters). Apparently the participants in theprogram showered together
in the large outhouse for this purpose, supervized bytheir commanding
officer. What Ifound interesting was thefollowing detail: that although
the men were showering naked, theofficer wore swimming trunks. But
to return to art.
Gericault's career begins amidst the crisis of militarism provoked by
the early success and eventual failureof theNapoleonic project. His first
Salon painting, the Charging Chasseur of 1812 (fig.3), isalready remark-
able for its alteration of the image of thewarrior when compared with
3. Theodore Gericault, Charging Chasseur. Paris, courtesyMusee duLouvre;
photo Reunion desMusees Nationaux.
NORMAN BRYSON
Gericault and "Masculinity"
239
again, off center (itproduces no senseof apex to afirmpyramidal com-
position). Also tellingisthedisposition of thehorse's limbs, which splay
out in all directions. No stability comes to the rider from his mount;
hesits on acharger whose footing isprecarious. Spatially there ismore
torsion, more spiraling of lines, and more sudden turning than makes
sense. The horse charg~,sjClr~ard,.but therider looks back asthough
theenemy had been missed; inasenseheistravelingbackward inspace.
The details I want particularly toemphasize, though, concern military
fashion. TIlerise ofNapole()n coincides with afantastic elaboration of
military costume in France.
1
'tnearmy of the ancien regime had been
one of mercenaries, but the grande armee is made up of citizens; the
political break is dramatized by theinvention of entirely new forms of
battle dress. Thenewcreations involvetremendous intensification of the
macho spectacle. At enormous expense, thelight cavalry aregivenelabo-
rate shako headgear, with Hungarian-style boots or riding breeches
buttoned at the side. Cuirassiers are given epaulettes, breastplates of
hammered steel over athick cuirass bordered with scarlet, helmets aug-
mented with thick horsehair crests and the tall, scarlet plumes known
as houpettes, with breeches of buckskin or chamois, and boots to the
knee (fig. 5). The dragoons havecoats of greencloth, helmets with cop-
per crests, and for their mounts sealskin (for thetroops) or panther skin
(for the officers)." On PrinceMurat this sort of paraphernalia sits rather
well.P But on the Charging Chasseur, it somehow misses: thelines are
"out," the bravura image of themaleemerges but isalso in some sense
ibotched. From the beginning C;er.i~,:l.!11t~t!.f:ssf:sJ hf: gjStancebetween an
actual i~nathe"i:magQ'fhai: cannotquite beattained.
The Wound~.dD,lira$$i~rwidensthegapsti1l further(~g~6). Here the
ba'ttTefiel~m9st invisible;.. AU .we.seeQUtis.some.smoke, flames, and
the suggesgg!!QLaXQlJ lat.a.greaJ distance, Re~~ya}t~9"rg".<l.~ti<?I1.t~~:s
awaY-the-narrativecontext.neeciedto explain the ~~re'sac.t.ion. (one
wondefswhetner there is an intimation of desertion). Essentially, the
figureof the malehere, andthroughout Gericault's military paintings, is
of an armor-plated being whose vulnerable interior body lies enclosed
behind thick protective layers (boots, gauntlets, helmet, cape), just as
the sword lies enclosed in its thick scabbard. There <irealso signs that,
besides sealing the bodyoff fromthe dangerousouter-worlJ ;~tl1e"cQ~s-
'tum:e'lsmtended to produce an:iIll(lgeof ~r~vIlE"a.:rhehdmet rises to
'itiiTIc-iesfthe"w;iist is girdled by abuckled belt and metal bands, the
trousers are piped, and the boots spurred. Yet this image of masculine
power and panache isat thesametimeunableto produce, or liveup to,
4. J ean-Antoine Gros, Battle of Aboukir (detail).Detroit, courtesyInstituteof
FineArts.
earlier Napoleonic battle scenes, suchasGros' depiction of Murat inthe
Battle of Abaukir (r806; fig. 4).9 In thelatter, the figureof the warrior
is surrounded by a narrative of battle with which the figure is entirely
coherent. The sword, for example, is related to the advance of horse
and rider and to its imminent victims, notably the Egyptian who lies
already crushed beneath Murat's onslaught. Gericault's representation
of the Chasseur is quite otherwise..Horse and rider have been spirited
away from the battlefield; ()l1~~.eesno surrounding military actionthat
-might explain the rider'~ acti()n~-se:-Insi:ead,the narrative order is
- c(}mparative1YOhscllre: Horse and-nder-arestrandea-somewhere away
tromi:he fray, and the furious turning of thehorse lacks rationale. One
notes, too, the irrational placement of thesword, no longer held aloft to
':crash down onthe enemy but turned inward toward thehorse. And the
costume is subtly disarrayed when compared with that of Murat. Here
the clues are more like nuances onemight overlook-Once "seen,though,
they are hard to deny. The Chasseur's right legflings bliIldlyout into
space, its profile appearing narrow and weak; his bearskin hat issee!Uc
ingly too large and somewhat askew, and thepanache thatc!:owns it is,
wounded or failed masculinity into aregister of half-statement and im-
plication; their interest lies in theway they understate the intimations
of failure to the point where theviewer detects them almost as atmo-
spheres. The Seated Hussar Trumpeter, for example, so removes the
figure from actual battle conditions that he seems now without occu-
pation, dressed and ready to sound the alarm, but seated and settled
in a way that suggests long waiting through empty hours (fig. 7). One
suggestion of the pose is that of sitting patiently to haveone's portrait
painted; the implication is one of preparedness to fight but actual in-
activity and exclusion from battle (connotations of rest border here on
those of convalescence). Consider theshadow cast by thefigure's right
leg: Here the strength of the leg, which thepiping and close fit of the
fabric emphasize, disappears into thesuggestion of astick, almost of a
crutch. The armof the capehangs slack andempty; helmet and plume
NORMAN BRYSON
6. Gericault, Wounded Cuirassier. Paris,
courtesy Musee du Louvre; photo
Reunion des Musees Nationaux.
5 Cuirassier of the znd regiment, from Troupes Fran-
caises. Martinet, Paris, courtesy Musee deL'Ernpire,
Salon-de-Provence.
its own sign,Sof strength. The position of each leg conveys instability;
thesword, signof aggression, isnowused asastaff, simply for physical
support. And the figureis wounded, at least inthe painting's title. But
wounded where? The eye, guided by the title, finds no actual wound,
only perhaps w~undedness, a,gene~al senseof hurt and fear.<Whatre~
mains unstated III the figure IS projected through the mount, with its
--burfi1niFerfi15ereyes-andexpressiOnof panic.
Later images of the \Vaffior-in Gericault move these themes of
Gericault and "Masculinity"
7. Gericault, Seated Hussar Trumpeter.
Vienna, courtesy Kunsthistorisches
Museum,
NORMAN BRYSON
Gericault and "Masculinity"
243
painting, the multiplication of these signs of male invulnerability and,
therefore, strength are made subtly continuous with facial details: The
moustaches are exaggerated, as are the side-whiskers and black eye-
brows. A secondary sexual characteristic of the male, facial hair, is
elaborated across a cultural code of masculinity to produce and build
up the signs of "virility," which extend back into the body inthe flared
nostril, and stern lower lip. At the sametimethis profusion of macho
signals is interestingly undermined. This subversion is almost entirely
accomplished by the use of black. The portrait is offset by blacks so
unremitting that over the imago of strength a pall is cast. Across the
color code, the blacks yield asemantic charge of the lugubrious, of an
inwardness filledwith melancholia. Intheface, anactivation of red and
white pigments creates temples sopallidthat thefacelooks drained. The
livid eyelids suggest exhaustion. Over thecheeks, red andwhite used in
bands (following asort of "stagemakeup" principle) imply haggardness
and perhaps encroaching age.
In subjects of this kind (they areCericault's principal subjects from
I8I2-I8I5), one is presented with acertain paradox of themasculine.,
The mas~\llinemustbe produced: The...sig.,I:lli, o(ma~r;:1J lif.l.i!Y_.ill:eJ lllllti-
P:!i@J :~c::~~s~~~eei1i:IE~d2Qdy.a~d..tQ.GQde.the"bodritsel.f.s0th~drom .. the
male boay\'ViJ lbeJ ?!Qil<r;:j:~dJ Ul .. unago"otsttengththat"lsnotslmply per-
'sonarbutn~tion:ai,thatof. the- citizen militia collectively orchestrating
theproduction of masculine image. At thesametime, thewhole process
is shown in astate of strain and fatigue: Despite the massive exertion
with which the masculine isproduced, andperhaps becauseof that ex-
ertion, the image topples and fails. Now, acertain way of reading these
images regards Gericault as simply reflecting, in personal terms, the
national trauma of thefailureof theNapoleonic adventure, particularly
asit affected Gericault's own class-the aristocracy andupper bourgeoi-
siethat ledthecampaign. I would not arguewith that view, but I would
like to ask for more precision concerning the links here between the
political (Waterloo, Elba, the Restoration) andthepersonal (expressed
through images of thewarrior wounded, stranded, mournful), for these
links may hold the greatest theoretical interest. One is dealing with an
"outer-world" phenomenon-the collapseof Napoleonic militarism-
and an "inner-world" phenomenon= Cericaulr's investigation of acer-
tain masculinity, in its crisis of simultaneous exacerbation and failure.
Critical here is the connection between the outer and inner worlds,
which I think in this case can be located-the particular usefulness of
Gericault asacasefor study-in thenature of militarycommand.
8. Gericault, Portrait of a Carabinier. Paris, courtesy Musee
du Louvre; photo Reunion desMusees Nationaux.
nod toward sleep. What isstated hereisthecessation of vigilance, alert-
ness, command; the emptying out, in fact, of the imago of strength,
which at oncedeflates, unbacked byforce or power.
With the Portrait of a Carabinier, the issues are less, I think, to do
with lossof strength than with thewholerelation of thebody to military
costume and to the markers of virility (fig. 8). A continuity is estab-
lished between fetishismon the body and fetishismof the body, On the
body are found layer upon layer of protective encasements, beginning
with the cuirass and continuing through at least four further integu-
ments: the scalloped jerkin, the square-collared coat, the dark under-
coat, and the white shirt beneath. To these are added the straps over
the cuirass, the scarlet epaulettes, the broad-sleeved gauntlets. In this
244 NORMAN BRYSON Gericault and "Masculinity"
Perhaps I can touch again onthose stories: Woody Allen's jokeabout
the way Freud wanted to confine the concept of penis envy to women,
and the Esalen anecdote, which concerned theway the superior in the
chain of command felt obliged, or was under orders, not to appear
naked before themen. The reason I mention thesestories isto get at this
question: Why do structures of hierarchy bite so deeply into the male
subject? Or, restated, what imaginable mechanism might account for
~
he w~y inwhich the political order is registered inor entered into the
sychic order of the male? How does political (patriarchal) power get
its deeper purchase inside male subjectivity?
Obviously I amunable to answer these questions, but a start might
be made if one recalls the contradictory position that the male subject
inhabits with regard to the identification with the father. On the one
hand, thepositive resolution of theOedipus requires themale subject to
identify with thefather; on theother hand, theincest taboo requires the
male not to identify with, not to introject or incorporate, the father's
sexual privilege, inparticular that of sexual accesstothe mother's body.
Freud names as the superego the agency that carries out the identifi-
cation, the introjection of the father; but this introjection is unable to
incorporate the sexual aspect of the father, hisphallic power and privi-
lege. These remain perpetually outside the male subject: The male is
enjoined to assume the phallic role, but the power of the phallus can
never behis. Thecrucial result istheexperience of inauthenticity within
the production of the masculine, that the male can never fully achieve
phallic power, however great the exertion toward that end. However
much the markers of themasculine proliferate, what subtends that pro-
liferation is lack within the position of the masculine, the deficit at its
very center. The structure thus reveals an impossibility, an impassable
contradiction, within theformation of themasculine. The male subject
must never know, or introject, the father's phallic strength, which re-
mains therefore always outside. HereWoody Allen's story isof moment.
If we grant that, pace Freud, there isapenis envy among men, then the
locus of phallic strength is never inside but only in other men: It is the
other males who haveit.
In Gericault's military paintings the social formthat deals with the
inferiority of the male subject concerning his identification with what
cannot be assumed and therefore remains "higher" and "outside" is
rank. Ineach of Gericault's military paintings, thefigureoccupies apre-
ciseplace in the hierarchy. Although for us the senseof where they all
stand ishazy, nothing ismore precisethan thepunctilio of rank inmili-
tary societies, and particularly those of the nineteenth century. Then,
simplyE.Y.gl.f..lJ l~in& at then:edals 0!l aman's chest aninformed eyecould
~~LQLhiSJ ;ntirec:ir~~ril1:~e~air, as Clearlyas reading a curriculum
vitae. ~J J lt:uigw:es..at:e. ..s.ubj.\<f!ir~!Lt,.",1!9kC;;!".2L@Em~'Liaison
between the political and subjective spheres is achieved by entering the
positions of thesocial hierarchy (here, themilitary hierarchy) across the
lack that inhabits themalesubject-the vacant center of masculinity. In
rank, the subject is always below (letus set to onesidethe exceptional
position of Napoleon); and what cements thesocial ranking, what gets
the political structure to bite as deeply as it does into the subjective
order of the masculine, is the permanent inferiority that results from
lack of phallic power. Which inasenseresolvestheOedipus inthesocial
rather than inthe family domain: Byentering into thefieldof inter-male
ranking, the inner lack within the masculine, its ineradicable sense of
inferiority, is linked to hierarchies that structure, order, and also use
and depend on thesenseof theinadequate masculine. G..fuiault'spaint-
i~s show how. at least for the military culture of histime, rank, which
invariably PQ$!iI9Q:ml[:~~.!!L!li~_SP:~if.1mQtill)J mIY~1TI1ha]jtl:;::[ffd
.. the.msense.QLmIIsc;;]J linin'aslak~,J 1RSence,. and failure, ~ohand inhand
acrossthsJ igaturebil}ding!he,~~)(1:l~ti;i~P91rt!c~r6raers. ' ..... . .
One'is dealing here, in other words, with a set of specific histori-
cal constructions of the masculine, current and widespread in Napo-
leonic military society, inwhich masculinity ispresented as an array of
imagos, compellingly impressive to themalesubjects to whom they are
addressed, and at the same timedrawing their power to excite by gen-
erating aglamor towhich thesubject aspires but which he doesnot yet,
and perhaps never can, possess. Theheroic body exists inthepermanent
place of the superior masculine towhich thesubject isattracted froma
place down below, of inferiority, adoration, evenabjection. A letter by
Carl Schehl from 1806, recording the entry of Napoleonic troops into
his city, describes precisely theimpact of such imagesof the super-virile
or the super-strong:
Troops crossed the city almost every day. 1liked to admire the handsome
drum-major and the bearded sappers with their high bearskin hats and
white leather aprons who always marched in the lead. My joy was even
greater when the cavalry arrived; I would show asquad of light cavalry-
men or hussars theway to their quarters and never missed achance to ask
them to mount their horses.
NORMAN BRYSON
Gericault and "Masculinity" 247
I had been in the company for fivemonths when, one Sunday, my chief
squadron sergeant major, passing in review the preparations for inspec-
tion, stopped in front of meand, after looking meover fromhead to foot,
said: "Parquin, you may have ahandsome uniform, but you are not asol-
dier! Your gaze should be assured, look me squarely in the whites of the
eyes; make metremble if you can! Youare in the army now!" This was in
theTwentieth regiment of chasseurs, and eventhough this was arelatively
new branch of the cavalry, their esprit decorps was very high.14
Drilling here is not only an objective process, a training of the body
that will make it compliant with orders andcommands comingfrom the
outside and on high; it is the internalization of the "outside" and "on
high," the systematic means of placing thesubject intheposition of in-
feriority with regard to theimago of strength that the body issupposed
to emit. That imago is to bereproduced not only byexternal means-
falling into line at drill-but by internal work, the creation of a sub-
jective attitude ("Parquin .... Youareinthe army now!") that comes
from taking theimago into theself andfashioning theself inaccordance
with its normative styling and protocols. At thesame timethe process
is always incomplete: the squadron sergeant major isnot yet impressed,
not yet "trembling" before Parquin's gaze, and Parquin is not yet the
full embodiment of the magnificent imago that exerts its pressure from
the higher point inthe chain of command.
The ability of thegrande armee to capture thehearts and minds of its
troops can be seen, in terms of military history, as afactor hardly less
important to the successof thearmy than anyother strategic innovation
in the domains of tactics, troop movements, or weaponry. Under the
ancien regime the army could bethought of asseparatefromthegreater
society, asaspecialized group performing specificfunctions, asaprofes-
sion. It might include mercenaries, paid to take orders, who had leased
their bodies to the state in return for soldiers' pay. But in the grand
armee, with its basis innational conscription, themilitary areno longer
agroup over there, and military serviceisnolonger exactlyaprofession:
The.armxi.!!2ri!1QPle,.cQllsiS.ts.QLe.'il:tUbl~:hQilied.male,".eye.r:Ylnewh0 I ,
'~cougi~.~~~!I~,~~.~,_~,"~!,~L~~!}~.Ih~,,~,2,~Yj!E,.!? 1~~g!!.s.!::~$~J Q,1he..-s.tate"iti~
~~tat~;,die state en:erges asanewkilldoFblOpohucal entity, and by
virtue of gender the male body belongs to the state, as state property. i
Hence th~gJ .o.ri.fL!.~t body: Inpost-Revolutionary France the'
te isnol~~~~gJ 2ut ill t~!;_.l:>9.~X Itse~h~
body's destiny for glory or defeat ISt of..till:_naU9_lle.s awfiOle."Wb:at
1)In(ISfl:1el.Tii itary state toget er and what holds in union its disparate
interests, classes, and groups, isacorps glorieux with whichthe citizen
militia must identify to the whites of their eyes. The military fashion
plates of the period (for example, fig. 5) giveonly the outw~rd ve.rsion
of that imago in its various forms; what they cannot show IS the mter-
nalization of those forms, their introjection into theinnermost layers of
subjectivity. Once theimago bites deepintothemalesubject it produces
a force as formidable as-more more formidable than-the force gen-
At about this time, in the fall of IBrI, we saw the arrival of the chiefs
of staff of the z.ndregiment of carabiniers, which was coming to billet.
This was themost beautiful regiment] had ever seen. Yes,I think that with
their uniform and equipment they were really the most beautful soldiers
in existence. All of the men were as tall as grenadiers and the horses were
almost of all of vigorous Norman stock.
The regiment had two uniforms: asky-blue one for everyday wear and
white uniform for dress parades, with sky-blue collar and facing. One had
tight, gray cloth breeches, with a basane (or bronze-lace) stripe, and the
other white breeches. The riding boots were high, shiny, and had jingling
spurs; and finally they wore a very large and heavy coat made of thick
white cloth, which virtually covered rider and horse.... The helmets and
armor of theofficersweredazzling with their gilding, and there was asilver
star on the breastplate.P
Unmistakable inthis passage isthe mixture of excitement at the display
of themale body in military splendor, with theabjection of its worship-
per, who casts himself intheroleof this masculinity's servant or groom.
In relation to the bravura display, Schehl presents himself as a humble
voyeur at the margins of the scene, who never misses a chance "to ask
them to mount their horses," and who fetishizes the glamorous body
images of his heroes into a series of fascinated glimpses of breeches,
boots, armor, spurs. Of hisown dress and appearance Schehl says noth-
ing; visually hehimself does not seemto exist inthe samedimension as
his heroes, or rather his involvement with their body imagery is as the
internal space across which the images pass, aspace of yearning for the
command and magnificence they alonepossess.
Schehl's reaction is perhaps an extreme case, from the edges of the
military campaigns. But inimportant ways it is continuous with the be-
havior and attitude of the troops themselves in their daily life and in
their ordinary routines. Another memoir records what must have been
afamiliar enough situation:
NORMAN BRYSON
Gericault and "Masculinity" 249
One must be born for it. No other condition requires more natural
predispositions, an innate flair for war, than that of thelight trooper. He
must have all of the qualities of the superior man: intelligence, will, and
strength. Constantly left to fend for himself, frequently exposed to combat,
accountable not only to the troops that hecommands but to those hepro-
tects and guides, he must keep his mental and physical faculties focused at
all times. His task is ahard one, but there areopportunities for distinction
every day.IS
erated by modernized equipment or ballistics or strategy. Each officer
must build himself in relation to that image:
In the case of Gericault, perhaps the most fascinating phase of his
work commences with the breakup of this corps glorieux, and the dis-
mantling of the Napoleonic military machine in1815.J l:l!;_Q.ele,"!.~9Lthe
grande armee is arguably different from previous military defeats in
E.t:eneh-historyl1nnatwhatll~~e Napoleonic era
wa.stne'riiascUlme"'1)ody'ttseIf;lts-streriitll and~h arIS-;;~'Its"capaci ty to
generate from the body the imago of thesuper-masculine or the super-
strong,:"l.,U",m~e!1~_.!he 0~1i!~~.!j.QJ 1.cl.!hat..i.mago.I~s~eakdown aDd
fra~ a trauma in~~l'llGtiQQQf bQdy
iIUe~h at, is eXJ 'e~-([iiEi:~ti.y.dy",.Qx.."Q~i:Wlt,. ..as.J J tter annihila-
tion. The images Gericault creates of wounded and defeated soldiers
turn on the wholesale disintegration of that collectiveorchestration of
the masculine image of bravura (figs. 9 and 10). Now that the superior
term in the chain of command is gone, and Napoloeon, Murat, and the
officers whose uniforms had made Schehl breathless with excitement in
I8II, arewritten out of history, thebody loses altogether itsreference to
that heroic imagefrom above and onhigh. Gericault records its mutila-
tion and agony, adestruction that isat thesametimemilitary, political,
and psycho-sexual. ,After 1815, he is left with basically tWQch.~to
..continue the pursuit of them~agnificenffiago outside the now dere-
i~ctmllI~!iE~n~~-:'~~E@11gattblroftlTeyearnffig"fOrPsYcfio::physical
magiiificence that slowly takes on visual form asThe Race of Riderless
Horses (figs. I I through 14); or to stay with the experience of 1815, to
explore asfar ashumanly possible thebreakup of theimageas apsycho-
sexual system-the theater of the dismantled Imaginary that Gericault
portrays in theRaft (fig. 15) and its accompanying studies (fig. 16), and
in the portraits of the insane (fig. 17).
With The Race of Riderless Horses theimago of malestrength ispro-
9. Gericault, Cart with Wounded Soldiers. Cambridge, photo
courtesy Fitzwilliam Museum.
duced across two terms, rider and horse, and therun,ners quickly assume
the air of macho allure that the series as awhole e~lsts to recapture and
recreate (theprocess isperhaps at its most intense~nthe ~ouvre picture,
fig. 13). One should say something of the material reality of the race
itself:
At the close of the [Roman] Carnival of 1817, in mid-February, Gericault
witnessed the race of the Barberi horses in the Corso, the stampede of
riderless horses, run traditionally in the city's central thorou~hfare on the
last fivedays of the Carnival. . ' . On the approach of evenmg a cannon
shot signalled the clearing of the Corso. A troop o~dragoons~ clatter-
ing down the street's length from the Palazzo Venezia to the PIazza ~el
Popolo swept it of the last carriages. Spectators meanwhile filled the Win-
dows overlooking the course and crowded into the wooden stands at the
obelisk in the Piazza. Preceded by senatorial guards in purple a~d yeUo,:
livery, the Barberi horses made their entrance, led to the starting POSI-
II. Gericault, Start of the Barberi Race. Lille, photo courtesy Musee des
Beaux-Arts.
10. Gericaulr, The Return from Russia. Roucn, photo courtesy Musee des
Beaux-Arts.
12. Gericaulr, Start of the Barberi Race. Baltimore, photo courtesy Walters Art
Gallery.
Gericault and "Masculinity" 253
13 Gericaulr, Start of the Barberi Race. Paris, courtesy Musee du Louvre;
photo Reunion des Musees Nationaux.
I5. Gericault, The Raft of the Medusa. Paris, courtesy Musee du Louvre;
photo Reunion desMusees Nationaux.
tion beneath the stands by costumed grooms who strained to keep them
from breaking away. Everything had been done to irritate and frighten the
animals; plumes nodded from their heads, firecrackers spluttered at their
tails, spikes dangled against their flanks. Intheir panic to escape across the
starting rope into the empty street before them, they viciously kicked and
reared, bit one another, and trampled the grooms holding them bythehead
and tail. The crowd waited in tense anticipation, all eyes on the struggling
men and horses penned in at the start, where fearful manglings were likely
to happen."
I4 Gericaulr, Four Youths Holding a Running Horse. Rouen, photo courtesy
Musee des Beaux-Arts.
Gericault presents the grooms in much the same way that hehad pre-
sented the military figures of r812-1814, through exaggeration of the
markers of masculinity. For example, the groom with the green tunic,
to the right in the Lilleversion of the subject (fig. II), exhibits thesame
preoccupation with the profile of virility that informs the Portrait of Cl
Carabinier (fig. 8): the beetling brow, aquiline nose, square jaw, and
broad neck. The legs are subjected to a muscular inflation that makes
themseemfar stronger and more robust than those of the rearing horse,
254
NORMAN BRYSON
Gericauli and "Masculinity" 255
r6. Gericault, Severed Heads. Stockholm, photo courtesy of
theNational Museum.
whose form connotes, by contrast, a kind of animal delicacy. In the
Baltimore version of theRace, the grooms aregivenposes wherein the
legsareconspicuously spread out (fig.12). Across acultural code that is
perhaps still current, suchastanceexpresses (for both genders) aheight-
enedstatement of sexual identity; heretheposeispushed almost toward
the "splits" in aheightening that borders on the physically impossible
(theexaggeration of "masculinity" here falls just short of toppling and
collapsing). Thefabric of tunic andhosemodels itself so closely tothigh
and calf (thefabric seems to have almost no thickness at all) that, even
more so than with the military costumes, the body shows through the
clothes.
Inwhat sensearetheseimages of masculinity rather than of, say, ItaIi-
anness, sport, or carnival? First, the activity they represent is entirely
confined to males. Second, thepossession of the qualities that are thus
madeexclusivetothemaleisunder challenge: Itisnot thehorses' mettle
that isbeingtested (herelies thedifferencefromordinary races) asmuch
asthat of thegrooms. Andthird, theimagesinvolvethewhole process of
idealization and identification that I havetried to locate as particularly
intense within this period's formations of masculinity. Though Geri-
17. Gericault, Man with Delusions of Military Command.
Winterthur, photo courtesy Museum Stiftung Oskar Reinhart.
cault's early portrayals of thescene(for example, theBaltimore picture,
fig. 12) are still anecdotal, with much picturesque detail of the course,
grandstand, and spectators, what theseries seeksisgreater and greater
idealization: The picturesque scene is refracted across, and corr~cted
by, such obvious prototypes asMichelangelo andthe~arth~non friezes
(fig. 13). "Idealization" here is not only a matter of .pl~tonal s.tylebut
of a whole social and subjective economy of machistic yearnmg that
measures the actual and real against thehigher imago: The real Roman
grooms, with their local costumeandsomewhat ser~an~-likestatu~, turn
into athletes from classical Athens, or from Arcadia (Ill the version at
NORMAN BRYSON
Gericault and "Masculinity" 2. 5 7
Ro.uen, fig. 14, their bonnets become antique Phrygian caps, they ac-
quireGreek costume, or Greek nudity, and thehorses they tame lose all
connection with carnival, becoming steeds likePegasus manes rhyming
with the clouds). '
If The Race of Riderless Horses centerson thepersistence of thequest
for glam()Ei~c:!I:l!'_gk>!.ifj~djmages-.ofmasculine.icle!l!it;Y>-witb_The_Raft
of thelvfeci.tt5.i: lj fig.: ..! sJ and its concomitant studies we are shown the
negative side of that queSi:~- asetoliiliag-escircuJ ating-betWeerfTaeiiTiZa-
ti?n and abje~tionl~ms of its~arr~!iY_~L!hL.&if..t..J 2QI!!:gy~a cOl11~u-
_~lltyfrom which all lgns~0..theJ }f[2ic have been {J nQY;cl.and...~in
\Wli~~lI!g~fthe systemofr~nk"nave broken"Qown. Inareverse
of the classic mutinYi;lot;-whe~~'the f(;wer-rarik; turn o-;th~' officers and
captain, here the higher-ups in the chain of command have turned on
thei~inferiors and havecast themonto thepathetically inadequate craft,
leavmg them to their fate. After thehorrible experiences on theraft, the
survivors exist inaspace absolutely outside thecivilizedsociety of rank
and position; they are human beings for whom theterms superior and
inferior no longer havemeaning..L!lJ ;h~~a.l()l1 picture (fig. Is)Gericault
reworks this ~im material i? suc~~\v!I~~.~.tl:~Y~~-il1""()"iI~~i:E~Di~~!fVe
:rt~~l~~~~~;J ~r~()a'~;~~<?~~~;~'Wte~!?~ .. I.~;~I()~~iJ ()!!m~ttiQn, the
.."' ".- ..-.--..-.-.----~"."'--"""..,- .. -- ,~'" ..~P}Cr: at w seapex
_~~~_~~~!.h!<figY.Xs;~~~~~:J ~::tu.re of si
9
palin to the ~esciie""sh[pliferany
rtl..l!m~~,~;,,~~~~~J li~lVi!Izea~ld. at lSJ ..~~.~~~~z.e "~~E.
<::2~!E~!E!!2!? : .. ln the Raft, between its narrative and its composition,
so.,.thll.! .fl.....stQJ :'y"OrC(lrelry;=fi1:~Tder-:ca5Ili .. aIism .... andc .. oii1"'Ter".. : I t " " - ' " ' . . . . ~
the soci~I .. is reco~fi~~,r:d..v.iS~~lIy ..~~.~h~ .. ords~et:~na{;r~'fJ .]y.. ~n~~~
il'l? s~~!emtfiarlia~jjQW11r.ed~~ly'[)r()k~n,do~g. J ust as The' Race of
Rtderless Horses continues topursue themagnificent imago beyond the
social con?iti~ns of its destruction in1815, theRaft~_9!1@!l~!h..lale
~~f the formal conventions of the Salon history
~~iEting3!!d a Q5:tsi.tentidealization of the ~.9dythat at' es comes
mto ~p'en coniliLwith_the..ll!:lrrative itse.!U@. .. !ale of starvation, wit
~eress ..idealized.and-aesthe.ticiz.ecL~. -
Yet accompanying this retroactive re-ordering or secondary revision
aretheRaft's parallel studies, wherethemasculinebody iscontemplated
in thelight of the complete destruction of itscoherent form(fig.16). The
male body is no longer able to produce any kind of phallic command
or even any kind of ego-image, in Lacan's sense. The capacity of the
Imaginary to lay the foundations of the subject in the form of a jubi-
lant, heroic image ceases to exist, and thework of the Imaginary itself
grinds to ahalt. What surfaces istheunconscious, which themagnificent
imago had repressed in order to exist; thebody sensed as incapable of
generating any image at all, with that inadequacy presented now as the
central feature of subjectivity-as its principal fact. The military por-
traits, like their surrounding culture, had used bodily magnificence as
a prize so seductive that it might beworth sacrificing to it one's actual
flesh. The glamor of the corps glorieux, with its promise of full phal-
lic power, could override and outdazzle any rival sense of the body as
fundamentally unable to liveup to, or incorporate, the image's imperi-
ous demands. With that imago now politically as well as psychically
ruined and obliterated, all that remains isflesh, mutilation, the carnage
of the Napoleonic battlefield resurfacing in the Restoration as a his-
torical memory that can no longer bewarded off or held at bay by the
constructed fiction of malesuperbia.
And finally, theportraits of theinsane. To alireat degree they remain
,acontradiction inzesms, Tl.'J :?!S!!HY,i!pmtrait w:orh,tc.plaGethe.sitter.~s
po_d)'il1).!s..P.r..QR~LR!:Is.Qn,Q-~ exact place in the hie~ rank,
wealth, a~ige-,_ itsJ ?rl!.fjdQc:~!!()I!O'I1,!E~_~<?.c:,iOlL~~R,..Bllt..the.ir:!-
sa:n:eareth()se who. aregff the social1!1e.nd~lhQ.halle....no. ... placejnthe
st~~~t~~~~-of ran1<;"who~e-po;t;'a;t~i;;a sense cannot be painted. Nor-
mally portraiture builds on thesubject's own creation of social "face,"
thefacade thesubject presents to theworld, the image round which self
structures its identity. But the insane of Gericault's portraits lack this
capacity; they havelost the power to project image of any kind, or to
build their subjectivity on its foundations. They lack "face" altogether,
just as the severed heads and limbs lack "body." Or they produce face
parodically, as inthepicture known asMan with Delusions of Military
Command (fig. 17), where oneseesfaciality that runs on automatic and
cannot be stopped-perhaps Gericault's last word on the nature and
the limits of the roleof theimageintheproduction of military identity.
renow used' gaze asjtpositions the fetnaJ e'
_~_nb.j~i~ that gaze. ~~l1~se i.!.1E.g:s of GeriC~.Huooest..is.j:~
need to com,..Qlicate tgatJ 2rey@J ng.!llillk1. One isforced by thepaintings
th~eIVeSto account for theprocess of identification that, inthecaseof
the male subject, is so fraught with disturbance ...ale"subjecti~.ity....can-
not beconsidere<!3J _~L'!ll?lr.!~uristic ini~svisua!!xEr~~s.ions, and~e
(~ni7L.th~.r>FQCess..,.QEiI@Inln!i.~entifi~.s.!J b-
lect positigl}.as..an..e:8;n'f!I1lely.-Complexnegotiarion"fJ .ncl.olle.rhat opens,
like all such negotiations, directly onto the field of history. The prob-
lemof identification that lies at thebase of "masculine" formations of
NORMAN BRYSON
Gericault and "Masculinity" 259
the subject is vital territory for visual theory to explore, not only in
its psychoanalytic but in its historical and visual constructions. In the
linkage between the malesubject, the male image, and the social hier-
archy, one of the key components of the political order of patriarchy
may, perhaps, be found.
hair fell inwavy locks on hisbroad shoulders; hehad black sideburns and
shining eyes; all of this created an effect of surprise and made one think
of acharlatan. But for all of his quirks, hehad great qualities; his bravery
defied belief; when hewent into battle, it was likeseeing one of those pal-
adins of antiquity .... At the time I saw Murat in Naples, he was at the
peak of his career; hewas surrounded bytheprestige of gloryand royalty;
his name was associated with all of the splendors of this marvelous epic
and his presence inspired in the troops adriving force and an incredible
enthusiasm. Quoted in ibid., 183.
NOTES 13. Quoted inibid., 192..
14. Quoted in ibid., 195
IS. Quoted inibid., 194
16. Eitner, Gericauit, His Life and Work, II7
I. See Kaja Silverman, "Fassbinder and Lacan: A Reconsideration of Gaze
Look and Image," Camera Obscura 19: 55ff., reprinted in the present volume:
Steve Neale, "Masculinity as Spectacle," Screen 2.4,6; zff.; Mary Ann Doane,
The Desire to Desire: The Women's Film of the 19405 (Bloomington, I987).
2. Laura Mulvey, "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema," Screen 16.
3. SeePierre Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice, trans. Richard Nice
(Cambridge, England, and New York, 1977), 196.
4. See Kaja Silverman, The Acoustic Mirror: the Female Voice in Psycho-
analysis and Cinema (Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1977), esp. chap. 4.
5. See Kaja Silverman, "Masochism and Male Subjectivity," Camera Cb-
scura 17:31ff.
6. J acques Lacan, "The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the
'I,'" in Ecrits: A Selection, ed. and trans. A. Sheridan (New York, 1977).
7. SeeJ . Winkler, "phallos Polirikos," Differences 2.,no. 1(I990): 2.0-45.
8. Sigmund Freud, "Fetishism," in The Standard Edition of the Complete
Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, ed. J ames Strachey (London, 1953-73,
2.1:31Iff.
9. On Gras and Gericault, see L. Eitner, Gericault: His Life and Work
(London, 1983), 30-33, figs. 2.-5, and pl. 2.2.
10. See The Age of Napoleon: Costume from Revolution to Empire: 1789-
IBI5 (New York, 1989).
II. See R. Brunon, "Uniforms of theNapoleonic Era," in The Age ofNapo-
leon, I79-20I.
12.. The bravura appearance of PrinceMurat is described by an officer of the
hussars who sketched himin I8II:
The king of Naples was tall and well-built, affable and genteel with every-
onewho approached him; his manners werepolite andsometimes hetalked
in rapid, imperious bursts. His gait was brisk. He always wore pompous
and flamboyant uniforms, something between aPoleand a Moslem, rich
fabrics, contrasting colors, furs, embroidery, pearls, and diamonds; his